Hating the New Thing in a Different Way

Loving people as they are seems like a rather straightforward idea. However, for the most part, it seems that we love people as they are but we also expect they will change. Specifically they will change that thing that we do not love. We might love our children, but expect they will grow out of some unfavorable behavior (like throwing tantrums). We might love our parents, but expect they will grow out of treating us like we are perpetually ten years old. We might love our partner, but expect that over the years they will change and put the dang seat down!

We might even love God, but expect God to change in how God interacts with the world (like eliminate sin).

The thing about loving people as they are but expecting them to change is that we will never love them.

If the person you love changes in the way that you would hope they would change, then you will find some other feature about that person that you wish they would change. It is an endless cycle. We will not be able to love them because we will end up hating the new thing they become in a different way.

You child grows out of throwing tantrums, but now they repress their emotions and you wish they would change that. Your parents treat you as an adult, but now they are pressing you to have children of your own, and you hate that. Your partner finally puts the seat down, but now you are annoyed that they let dishes “soak” for three days!

Even when God eliminates sin, God now welcomes the former sinner into the kingdom and you wish that God would see that “those people” are freeloading on forgiveness.

We are faced with the paradox to love people as they are and not expect them to change, or never loving them at all.

Christianity: A Bounded Centered Set

Maybe you have heard that there are a ways to categorize people and things. Two common ways to think about categorization is either as a bounded set or a centered set. Do not let the language trip you up, they are very intuitive once you know.

A bounded set is defined by its boundaries. If it metal and has wings, it is a plane. If you have blue eyes you don’t have brown eyes. We can group things into “sets” based upon the boundaries we draw. This is so common of a practice, that I bet you had no idea it had a name!

The other type of categorization is what is called a centered set, which is a group that is not defied by it’s boundaries but by the center. If a bounded set is concerned with who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’, a centered set is concerned with the direction a person is moving. Are they moving toward or away from the center.

Image from: https://thehappypastor.wordpress.com/tag/bounded-set/

It might be easy to break this into a conservative/orthodoxy/bounded set verses a liberal/orthopraxy/centered set debate. However the reality is that Christianity is not a bounded OR a centered set.

Christianity is both.

Christianity is a way of living in that world that puts Christ at the center of our lives. Thus it is a centered set. It is a faith that understands that Christ and Paul and the early church worked did so much to break the idea of religion as a bounded set. When Jesus ate with prostitutes and Paul welcomed gentiles, when Jesus called a tax collector and Peter was told to not deem anything unclean which God declared clean, it is clear to me that one of the Christian projects is to dismantle bounded set categorization of people.

And yet, you may see, that to be a people who are centered on Christ who calls us to reject bounded set thinking, Christianity paradoxically becomes a bounded set.

To put it another way: Christianity is bounded set centered on the one who calls for the dismantling of bounded thinking.

This is a paradox, a mystery of the faith. Be mindful of those who might say that Christianity is only one or the other. To remove one set from our call is to cheapen and soften the challenging call of Christ.

One Church Model as Yeast

The Nicene and Apostle's creed both have a line that affirms belief in the holy catholic church and if we read it too quickly then we overlook the mystery of that phrase. 

I was reminded not long ago in a meeting with church leaders the meanings of these words. 

• holy - set apart 
• catholic - throughout the whole
• church - the body that comes together in order to be sent out

If the point of the church is to be sent out, then why would it come together to begin with? Some might even call this a paradox others might see this is really inefficient. If the point is to be sent out, then are we not going against the point when we come together? Many of us see the benefits of coming together in order to be sent out and are not hung up by this paradox. However, fewer of us are able to reconcile the paradox of something that is both set apart and throughout the whole. 

We like to think that we are able to hold two ideas in our heads at the same time and give them equal weight. We like to think that we do not privilege one side over the other. We like to think that we are able to hold the paradox, but more often than not we will place one position over the other. Despite our inability to hold paradoxes, we continue to try because we know that life is never one or the other, but full of contradictions and paradoxes. 

For instance, are you a parent or a child? What color is the dress? What do you hear? Maybe the most basic paradox - "this sentence is false."

The divisions in the church these days might be understood as our unwillingness to attempt to hold these tensions together. Some elevate the role of the church as holy (set apart and different) while others elevate the role of the church as catholic (though out the whole or sometimes understood as universal).

Photo by Drew Coffman on Unsplash

You may recall that Jesus attempted to address this paradox of being set apart and through out the whole by speaking of yeast. Yeast is different form the whole and yet in order for yeast to function it has to be through out the whole batch. 

The UMC faces a number of decisions in February 2019 around how to include LGBTQIA+ people in the church. It seems to me that the option that is most like the church as yeast is what is called the "One Church Model." This model gives the decision about ordination and marriage to the most local body able to make the decision. Conferences decide who they are going to ordain as it is now, pastors decide who they are going to marry as it is now, and churches decide what types of ceremonies are allowed on church property now.

If we allow the the decision of how to include LGBTQIA+ persons to be spread through out the whole of the church then, paradoxically and mysteriously, the yeast retains its holiness. It seems clear to me that if the status quo remains or if there is a dramatic change in the current stance, then we move closer to being holy OR catholic. 

This is one more reason why I believe the "One Church model" not only is in line with the creeds, but is in line with our historical and Wesleyan tradition of affirming the holy, catholic church.

The tension of doing things to be seen

Near the beginning of the "sermon on the mount", Jesus teaches the following:

"Beware of practising your piety before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven. ‘So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your alms may be done in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you. And whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and at the street corners, so that they may be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward. But whenever you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you."

The common understanding of this text is straightforward and literal - don't do acts of piety in order to be seen.

“Setting an example is not the main means of influencing others, it is the only means.” - Albert Einstein 

The truth be told, there are some things that I do in my life in order to be seen - especially by my sons. I want him to see me be graceful toward others, so sometimes I act graceful even when I do not feel graceful - just so they will see graceful models. There are times when, as a pastor, you have to do things that you may not want to do in order to set a better model for others. I do not get the luxury of going to worship and just sit there and not talk with anyone - even if that is what I feel like doing. I have to be "pastoral" sometimes just to be seen and set a model.

Do you know how many times pastors go home or sit in their offices and scream or cry at the amount of venom they encounter? And at least half of our emotions are because we cannot do what we want to do or what others seem to have no problem doing. Pastors have to act in ways in order to be seen, not for bragging, but as a way to set an alternate model. And before we jump to the conclusion that pastors are hypocrites (which everyone really is), there are strong social pressures on pastors to be a certain way.

For instance, pastors cannot cuss, they have to wear suits (or at least tuck in their shirt), be older/experienced, etc. There is a pressure for a pastor to "look the part" and if they don't then there is an aura of suspicion. 

From internal pressures and external expectations, pastors are asked to do a lot things in order to be seen. And that makes this teaching of Jesus very difficult for church leaders.